You already ignored posts on QM logic by actual PhD folks ... but you know better than them ... sure you do ;-)

You disingenuously ignore most of the text of the very wiki pages you cite and you have the nerve to accuse me of ignoring your nonsense posts. Just like Casperov, you quote Ph.D.s without even the slightest inkling of understanding of what they're actually talking about, and I won't even dignify them with a response. You are in no mood to learn, and I can't make someone learn who doesn't want to learn.

You disingenuously ignore most of the text of the very wiki pages you cite and you have the nerve to accuse me of ignoring your nonsense posts. Just like Casperov, you quote Ph.D.s without even the slightest inkling of understanding of what they're actually talking about, and I won't even dignify them with a response. You are in no mood to learn, and I can't make someone learn who doesn't want to learn.

So you are a god and I am only a mere demigod? Is that it? Ego much ;-)) Remember the Aesop fable about the big frog?

Better a big frog than a fly. I don't think you understand the subject matter as well as you think you do. I don't actually pretend to know more than my studies justify, though it may seem that way to you. I just know enough to know that you're talking crap here. As always, knowledge is demonstrated, not asserted.

Better a big frog than a fly. I don't think you understand the subject matter as well as you think you do. I don't actually pretend to know more than my studies justify, though it may seem that way to you. I just know enough to know that you're talking crap here. As always, knowledge is demonstrated, not asserted.

You claim to know ... while trying to claim that you don't. I make no claim to knowledge on these more technical subjects ... that I bring up. I simply bring them up and make small comments. Then you put on your Spanish Inquisition hat and start the auto-da-fe. There are selected technical areas that I have decades of experience in ... but I am not going to elucidate for your benefit. I am not here to show off, or bore people with technical minutae. I implicitly poke holes in bullshit by showing that there is an alternative to your authoritarianism. You simply want me to give you more evidence to excuse a tightening of your rack ... as a target of your torture for the last 2 years. Fortunately as Rubber Man ... I am immune to your Procrustean tendencies. A lame superpower, but not useless.

Since a pure liar always lies, such a person claiming that they are a pure liar would be telling the absolute truth — therefore, the pure liar cannot say that he is a pure liar, because he only lies. On the other hand, because a pure liar can never claim to be a pure liar, any person claiming to be a pure liar is not; they tell the truth sometimes, just not here.

The key here is just because you're able to articulate a thought, doesn't mean that the thought describes a logically coherent situation. Your brain is not a logical system, but an evolutionary one. While it can emulate a logical system with training, you can entertain thoughts that are contradictory. It is, after all, why we have peer review.